It's simple to understand the distinction between static and dynamic aspects in theory. Dynamic aspects precipitate change, they are likely to "do something." Static aspects precipitate a kind self-satisfaction, a contented state. But in practice it's unclear what this might mean. Barring extreme examples, complete inactivity is impossible, everyone is bound to "do something," so in what ways are the doings of a trine aspect different from an opposition's? Is there really a difference in dynamism? Is there a general rule about how that dynamism might assemble and express planetary influences?

To my mind, static aspects very often do result in "action" but the action is often confined to the native's own mind/psyche/soul or whatever, without a particular pressure to manifest in actions in the external world. Whereas dynamic aspects tend to manifest in the external world as well. Simplistically, Mars trine = I want to hit people, vs Mars square = I hit people. In situations where static aspects are valid: nativities, progressions, solar returns read as a "new nativity", I find the distinction probabilistic rather than absolute. Again simplistically Mars trine may mean I hit people and Mars square I only want to hit people, depending on the whole chart, but the other way around is the way to bet. Another analogy: If your chart is a movie, dynamic aspects are the stars, static aspects are the supporting cast.

And in any case to pick a random example, Venus square Saturn vs. Venus trine Saturn. The fundamental fact is that Venus-Saturn are in aspect, what aspect it is, is meaningful but secondary.

Now this is all in contexts involving "incidents" as Cyril Fagan called them: the nativity itself and the various things that indicate the unfolding of the native's inborn potential.

Barring extreme examples, complete inactivity is impossible, everyone is bound to "do something," so in what ways are the doings of a trine aspect different from an opposition's? Is there really a difference in dynamism? Is there a general rule about how that dynamism might assemble and express planetary influences?

Were you speaking of transits or of natal aspect? - I assume natal aspect since you posted this in the Natal Astrology | Aspects forum instead of the Transits forum. (For transits the rule is simple: Don't bother with static aspect.)

In natal astrology, you've already quoted the rule, which is intentionally stated so as not to imply more details than you can count on. In practice, this does come out in different familiar scenarios, but, again, these are just variant scenarios. In learning astrology, it's probably best to operate under the fiction that trines and sextiles are simply weaker - its not true, but it probably gets you to a right "feel" faster than anything time.

Much of the rest depends on how the aspects are in context to the rest of the chart's aspect patterns; it's especially hard to give guidelines outside of a particular situation. For example, a trine or sextile tied to another aspect construct behaves distinctively differently from the same trine or sextile standing alone (in the former case it is more likely to modify or contextualize the hard aspect).

Often you can perhaps see this "weaker" fiction as no pressing need to act on the psychological energies. For example, last night in class I did horoscopes of two women with Mars-Pluto aspects within 1-2°. One had Mars angular (square Ascendant) and the aspect was a nearly exact trine. The other was a close square with both planets middleground. Despite the fact that the first had Mars as the most angular planet, it was the second - the women with the square - who said she has to stay on top of managing her Mars-Pluto side because the enormous energy just has to be expressed, that she simply must keep finding occasions to act on those explosive, powerful energies demanding expression. No such demand pressure existed for the woman with a Mars-Pluto trine despite being by far the more martial personality, with Mars exactly angular, a Mars-ruled Sun, the Mars-Pluto tightly configured to her Moon, etc. The trine churned and bubbled and was always present, that intensive energy always contained and generally available as she needed it, but she didn't seem to have any insistent need to vent it.

To my mind, static aspects very often do result in "action" but the action is often confined to the native's own mind/psyche/soul or whatever, without a particular pressure to manifest in actions in the external world. Whereas dynamic aspects tend to manifest in the external world as well. Simplistically, Mars trine = I want to hit people, vs Mars square = I hit people. In situations where static aspects are valid: nativities, progressions, solar returns read as a "new nativity", I find the distinction probabilistic rather than absolute. Again simplistically Mars trine may mean I hit people and Mars square I only want to hit people, depending on the whole chart, but the other way around is the way to bet. Another analogy: If your chart is a movie, dynamic aspects are the stars, static aspects are the supporting cast.

Hi Mike. Thank you for your answer, this helped a lot. So as I understand it, dynamic aspects are what we notice first about others, the actions they are likely to take in the world, the actions they sincerely need to.

And in any case to pick a random example, Venus square Saturn vs. Venus trine Saturn. The fundamental fact is that Venus-Saturn are in aspect, what aspect it is, is meaningful but secondary.

Considering everything i wouldn't say that particular aspects are secondary to the what planets are in question, the aspect shapes the person by shaping the influences about them, by shaping the way that they manifest. If I understand this all correctly, they largely determine the course of tendencies, and perhaps even the course of a life, and this sounds primary to me, equal in importance. Taking your Mars example, I don't think it's a stretch to say that a dynamic aspect in that case would lead to more trouble in the life than would a static one, the events in the life seem to follow aspect motility. Of course I could be completely wrong, this all just sounds very very important to me.

Much of the rest depends on how the aspects are in context to the rest of the chart's aspect patterns; it's especially hard to give guidelines outside of a particular situation. For example, a trine or sextile tied to another aspect construct behaves distinctively differently from the same trine or sextile standing alone (in the former case it is more likely to modify or contextualize the hard aspect).

Would a close trine or sextile tied to a close square make the square less noticeable? Would the need for expression become less intense? I didn't know that aspect structures could be modified in this way, this is extremely important. Thank you.

Often you can perhaps see this "weaker" fiction as no pressing need to act on the psychological energies. For example, last night in class I did horoscopes of two women with Mars-Pluto aspects within 1-2°. One had Mars angular (square Ascendant) and the aspect was a nearly exact trine. The other was a close square with both planets middleground. Despite the fact that the first had Mars as the most angular planet, it was the second - the women with the square - who said she has to stay on top of managing her Mars-Pluto side because the enormous energy just has to be expressed, that she simply must keep finding occasions to act on those explosive, powerful energies demanding expression. No such demand pressure existed for the woman with a Mars-Pluto trine despite being by far the more martial personality, with Mars exactly angular, a Mars-ruled Sun, the Mars-Pluto tightly configured to her Moon, etc. The trine churned and bubbled and was always present, that intensive energy always contained and generally available as she needed it, but she didn't seem to have any insistent need to vent it.

The woman with the angular Mars had a lesser need to express its influences? This example is outstanding, thank you for sharing. This makes me feel that soft aspects are to be ignored, they don't seem to say much about someone if they don't incline them to act. At the same time though I wonder how, since this is all the case, can soft aspects be common for murderers?

Much of the rest depends on how the aspects are in context to the rest of the chart's aspect patterns; it's especially hard to give guidelines outside of a particular situation. For example, a trine or sextile tied to another aspect construct behaves distinctively differently from the same trine or sextile standing alone (in the former case it is more likely to modify or contextualize the hard aspect).

Would a close trine or sextile tied to a close square make the square less noticeable?

No. That's old Tropical good/bad thinking. In fact, the Nelson research shows an opposing tendency, that soft aspects atop hard aspects intensify them (at least where solar weather is concerned), while in isolation they tend to have no discernible effect or to be suppressive.

Would the need for expression become less intense?

It's not that simple. (None of this is. I'm resisting giving any generalizations, and those that I seem to give should not be taken by you anything firm or reliable outside of the unique context in which they occur.) It may be as simple as they provide modification and context. Quite often (and perhaps always) the main effect is complexity - I think soft aspects play to a more complex, nuanced, structured part of our psyche and are less instinctual and simple, and this sometimes shows.

I didn't know that aspect structures could be modified in this way, this is extremely important. Thank you.

You're welcome. Imagine, for example, two people with a Venus-Mars opposition or conjunction. One has it trine or sextile Jupiter, one has it trine or sextile Saturn. You should expect dramatically different outcomes. - The different kind of behaviors of soft aspects in different situations probably refers to a single characteristic of them, but that single characteristic them produces outward /visible results under different conditions.

Often you can perhaps see this "weaker" fiction as no pressing need to act on the psychological energies. For example, last night in class I did horoscopes of two women with Mars-Pluto aspects within 1-2°. One had Mars angular (square Ascendant) and the aspect was a nearly exact trine. The other was a close square with both planets middleground. Despite the fact that the first had Mars as the most angular planet, it was the second - the women with the square - who said she has to stay on top of managing her Mars-Pluto side because the enormous energy just has to be expressed, that she simply must keep finding occasions to act on those explosive, powerful energies demanding expression. No such demand pressure existed for the woman with a Mars-Pluto trine despite being by far the more martial personality, with Mars exactly angular, a Mars-ruled Sun, the Mars-Pluto tightly configured to her Moon, etc. The trine churned and bubbled and was always present, that intensive energy always contained and generally available as she needed it, but she didn't seem to have any insistent need to vent it.

The woman with the angular Mars had a lesser need to express its influences?

The influence of the Mars-Pluto aspect, yes. (Not Mars per se. She's very martial. But the distinctive characteristics of Mars-Pluto are different matter.)

This example is outstanding, thank you for sharing. This makes me feel that soft aspects are to be ignored, they don't seem to say much about someone if they don't incline them to act. At the same time though I wonder how, since this is all the case, can soft aspects be common for murderers?

The majority of Sidereal astroilogy teachers have taught their classes to ignore trines and sextiles. (Fagan and Bradley didn't, but the majority of teachers in astrology schools have.) I agree to the extent that beginners are probably best served by just being told that they are weaker and often can be conveniently overlooked, and I do that knowing it is a brazen lie which, however, will produce better astrologers than telling the whole nuanced truth to beginners.

I'm resisting giving any generalizations, and those that I seem to give should not be taken by you anything firm or reliable outside of the unique context in which they occur[/i].) It may be as simple as they provide modification and context..

I wish there was a rule for this. i might have to change my query. In what way can context be provided to an aspect structure? What does that mean exactly? Do you mean that, for instance, two aspects in conjunction and making a soft aspect to Jupiter, lets say, would channel their needs through the need for refinement and socialization?

The majority of Sidereal astrology teachers have taught their classes to ignore trines and sextiles. (Fagan and Bradley didn't, but the majority of teachers in astrology schools have.) I agree to the extent that beginners are probably best served by just being told that they are weaker and often can be conveniently overlooked, and I do that knowing it is a brazen lie which, however, will produce better astrologers than telling the whole nuanced truth to beginners.

I wish there was a rule for this. i might have to change my query. In what way can context be provided to an aspect structure?

Give me 20 charts and I'll give you 10-20 answers. Really, you can't make this mechanical. You have to understand the one root principle, understand the psyche of person whose chart you're looking at, and apply that one rule you knew from the beginning to the specific context of the individual.

It's clean and simple in the sense that it's a single principle. It sounds complicated because people are complicated and you have to understand this subtlety and nuance in the context of a complicated person.

Do you mean that, for instance, two aspects in conjunction and making a soft aspect to Jupiter, lets say, would channel their needs through the need for refinement and socialization?

That's one way. Or simply that the conjunction is likely to be prosperous and go well. Or that it's likely to work in a Jupiter context (such as in entertainment or religion). Jupiter is the modifying. - Of course, this starts rearranging if one or both of the Jupiter aspects is closer orb than the conjunction

Can I know which is the stronger aspect to my Mars? The 1º47' Mars-Saturn sesquisquare or the 1º21' Mars-Jupiter trine?

I think both are fairly weak. Although it seems that my Mars being background would strengthen the Mars-Saturn aspect and it's placement in Sagittarius would strengthen the Mars-Jupiter aspect.

I don't think I go through everything a person with a stronger Mars-Saturn aspect goes through, especially with facing life as a constant struggle. Other traits like physical weakness and a considerably understated masculinity could be attributed to my background Mars too/instead (and my Sun in fall).

And I definitely don't feel much Mars-Jupiter in me, especially when compared to men with close Mars-Jupiter hard aspects. I'm hardly strong, fit and athletic, and I am not that attracted and enthusiatic to competitive environments. My ardent sexuality can be instead be a part of my Capricorn Moon. But yes I can be morally courageous, and I have a hard time saving money - something always comes up that makes me spend a good portion of my piggy bank. My strong beliefs could be a Sagittarian Mars thing too.

Can I know which is the stronger aspect to my Mars? The 1º47' Mars-Saturn sesquisquare or the 1º21' Mars-Jupiter trine?

Great question. The Mars-Saturn sesqui-square is near the end of its orb and would be classified as a Class 2 aspect. The Mars-Jupiter trine is a close Class 1 aspect. Purely by orb, Mars-Jupiter is stronger. However, by nature of the aspect, Mars-Saturn is more dynamic.

The question comes down to what one means by "stronger." Mars-Saturn is a weaker aspect, a lesser energy, but the particular nature of the energy is a demand for outward expression. The Mars-Jupiter is a stronger aspect (a greater energy behind it) but that energy does not demand expression.

To complicate it further, your Mars is in Sagittarius, so it is going to have a further Jupiter coloration. I'd say on balance that Mars-Jupiter is the stronger, and ends up characterizing your Mars as "well-aspected," but the Mars-Saturn is a pushier energy and will demand its voice in your life: There is an important side of you that simply needs to struggle, to have things rough, to have to right something. (Besides, as a Capricorn Moon, you already have a natural comfort with a co-existing of Mars and Saturn energies.)

And I definitely don't feel much Mars-Jupiter in me, especially when compared to men with close Mars-Jupiter hard aspects.

Right. It's a different type of energy. It is fortunate (given that your Mars is background) that the Mars-Saturn does not demand expression. You're comfortable with how it is.

But the Mars-Saturn is more likely to demand expression, to demand that you struggle with something (probably something of a Sagittarian nature). Since Saturn is foreground, that will primarily work out through your Saturn nature, perhaps through your Capricorn Moon square Saturn.

I'm hardly strong, fit and athletic, and I am not that attracted and enthusiastic to competitive environments.

I'd say on balance that Mars-Jupiter is the stronger, and ends up characterizing your Mars as "well-aspected," but the Mars-Saturn is a pushier energy and will demand its voice in your life: There is an important side of you that simply needs to struggle, to have things rough, to have to right something. (Besides, as a Capricorn Moon, you already have a natural comfort with a co-existing of Mars and Saturn energies.)

But the Mars-Saturn is more likely to demand expression, to demand that you struggle with something (probably something of a Sagittarian nature). Since Saturn is foreground, that will primarily work out through your Saturn nature, perhaps through your Capricorn Moon square Saturn.

This is interesting. Generally as a Jupiter angular person, I'm not that comfortable with struggle and hardship, but I do eventually get to handle it thanks to my double-Saturn luminaries.
The word "struggle" gets me a little anxious, I keep thinking that it could something major. Maybe it's just something I deal with everyday, like general online homophobia (not directed to me though), conservative values that I'm not too comfortable and okay with, and the like. The latter is a Sagittarian thing.

Well don't you say!
Maybe one of the earliest things I've noticed once I realised I'm gay, is that I don't impose too much of my masculine ideals on myself as much. (It's not that I strongly impose them on myself anyway, but now much less.) I think it's because being gay, I know I can get a masculine partner instead of being very masculine. Relating to Mars in others fulfils my Mars needs so much better than being masculine myself. (Or something like that. I don't think I'm putting my feelings as accurately in words.)

It's simple to understand the distinction between static and dynamic aspects in theory. Dynamic aspects precipitate change, they are likely to "do something." Static aspects precipitate a kind self-satisfaction, a contented state. But in practice it's unclear what this might mean.

This question you raised has kept me thinking for a while. Through my own observation and reading I think I may have came to something. And I have to say all these are the result of my thinking and might has lots of faults/incompleteness in them. I just hope this helps.

Thank you for your thoughts, I'm glad the query has sent your mind going!

On natal aspect I generally agree to what jim said that dynamic aspect gives a psychological pressure for expression. But I have my own understanding to specific aspect pattern.

Square aspect, especially, I think this is the perpetrator aspect. People with square aspect often willingly inflict the energy involved in the planets to other people. For example people with a mercury-pluto square most likely plays the role of interrogator and people with a mars-pluto square likes to play an abusive role to their partner. Mars-pluto square, together with mars-saturn square, is the bully aspect. People with mercury-jupiter likes to be a teacher and etc. Venus-pluto square may actively spoil other people's relationship by playing "3rd party". This aspect is intense and dramatic in its manifestation with the aspect owner as the perpetrator.

I've definitely seen the truth of this, there's something engaged about square aspects, there's an active participation about them.

Opposition aspect, I have yet to acquire more info on this aspect. But this aspect seems to be more passive(victim) than the square aspect.And I think this aspect has a quality of fate, meaning God might give people with this aspect specific task/event to accomplish or endure. They will meet in their life path/outside world certain problems as symbolized by planets in the opposition aspect to deal with People with this aspect seems to have to deal with confrontation energy from outside world. For example ,unlike square aspect, mercury-pluto opposition people may not like to actively interrogate people but they might, in their life path, face some research project or mysterious event that were thrusted on their face for them to solve. And venus-pluto opposition may in their life path have their marriage/love affair destoryed by "the other guy". A mars jupiter opposition may find himself fighting through many battles in life and acquire many victory along the way. etc. A mars saturn opposition might have to face disease, difficulty in accomplishing one's goal and later in life develop endurance and discipline because of these challenges.

But I disagree on squares being qualitatively different from oppositions. My closest aspect is 0°16 opposition between Mercury and Pluto and, as a Mercury/Pluto person, I definitely couldn't call myself passive. This aspect is overwhelmingly engaged and as far as my memory has allowed, I recall playing the role of perspicacious interrogator of the world and its members and never the other way around for most of my life. I'm purely confrontational, indefatigably so, and I will call everyone out on everything without hesitation. My 3rd closest aspect is a 0°31 opposition between the Moon and Jupiter and I couldn't say that the world has ever been gracious or charming toward me without my own graciousness or charm being involved first, to give another example.

Oppositions don't really seem to suggest what the world brings us, in the same way that squares don't, but likely indicate what one brings to the world, the same way that squares do. I believe Mr. Eshelman would say that the only instance where a square or opposition might indicate an accident (event) or an incident (self wrought event) would be in a transit, SSR, SLR, or some other prognostic tool.

Trine aspect. One can get easy benefit from these aspects. People who have trine can easily manifest the positive energy embodied in the planets.Generally speaking they do not act like opposition and square, meaning that trine aspect is neither perpetuator nor victim and more often than not plays a constructive role in life. A trine between mercury-pluto means depth of thinking and they are capable of innovation and research whlie they do not feel strong internal pressure to interrogate others. But when you talk to these people they possess all the characteristic of mercury-pluto and can be quite provocative and dark in their thought process. But they express this energy in a milder and acceptable way and dont cause much discomfort to other people. But I also found that trine aspect are not completely immune to its negative manifestation, especially when malefic planets are involved. Even a mars pluto or mars saturn trine can give its owner abusive personality, but it's expressed in a milder way. For example , if mars and saturn are in trine, its owner has great self-discipline and can take on much responsibility in life, at the same time he possess the authority to discipline other people without making them feel harmed. On the other hand, a mars saturn square people can be quite abusive in playing the authority role and is likely to oppress the other party.

I also disagree that trine aspects are easily benefited from. If one has an artistic talent or some other mental aptitude the products of which would captivate the whole world and in turn swell his own pockets, but without any strong urge toward expression, as trines seem to symbolize, he would reap nothing. I have both Venus and Jupiter, the Lesser and Greater Benefics, configured in a trine with 1°17 degrees in my geniture. Many would consider this the most fortunate aspect configuration, but, as Mr. Eshelman has noted in his aspect description resource, "hard aspects" between Venus and Jupiter are the single most common configuration for 99 heads of state, and not trines or sextiles. This reflects my own experience quite well. I've had no strong urge to make manifest whatever a close correspondence between the two benefics might symbolize, and I believe a square or opposition in this case would be much more fortunate than a soft aspect, given the data (though the N-size is small),

Conjunction is an aspect I have little experience with. But I think it's similar to trine aspect. It's not like square who likes to play perpetuator and it has a effortless and spontaneous nature to it. So I think conjunction is the same in nature with a trine, only stronger.

Would say conjunctions are closer in nature to squares and oppositions than trines, there's a certain pressure about them.

sextile is a weak form of trine. Good energy is easily emanated from planets embodied in sextile aspect, albeit weaker. And bad energy, even if it emanates from a sextile aspect, is too weak to have much influence on life.

I'm not sure of the notion of sextiles being weaker than anything, those I know whose only partile aspects are sextiles seem to embody the configuration quite vibrantly, perhaps not with the same impulsiveness one might observe of squares for instance, but still there's something distinct in their behavior.

Generally, cool's comments remind me more of the approach in most Tropical literature where there is both a stronger need to minutely distinguish different types of aspects and, especially, to frame those distinctions in language reminiscent of house relationships. I would disagree with most of the points other than (like you) thinking the language on squares is pretty decent and descriptive of the whole family of dynamic aspects.

Oppositions don't really seem to suggest what the world brings us, in the same way that squares don't, but likely indicate what one brings to the world, the same way that squares do. I believe Mr. Eshelman would say that the only instance where a square or opposition might indicate an accident (event) or an incident (self wrought event) would be in a transit, SSR, SLR, or some other prognostic tool.

I would nuance this only in the following away, and I emphasize that these are subtle distinctions: While I see the entire series of "2-series" aspects (those that start with the conjunction then progressively divide the circle by 2, i.e., 45° multiples) as substantially the same, there doe tend to be (what I might call) a degradation of identification at each step, I first noticed this with Sun-Saturn aspects, where Sun-Saturn conjunction pepe, at least as adults, settled easily into the identification mode of "I am Saturn," the Sun-Saturn opposition people had more characteristics of (acting like they were feeling like) they were continually under a Saturn transit to their Sun. This ends up looking a lot like "I am Saturn," but begins with a different life experience Squares then have a little more "degradation of identification" but no loss of energy or degradation of the connection of the planets. And so forth.

To be clear, I'm not saying "treat them as transits" in the sense that the natal aspects cause events, but that people's experience of having these aspects is more like the experience of having been under the long-term effect of a transit. For example (all other things being equal), Sun-Saturn opposition people are more likely to feel suppressed and, therefore, that they are struggling with authority over their autonomy, whereas Sun-Saturn conjunction people take up psychological ownership of their Saturn sides more readily.

Generally, cool's comments remind me more of the approach in most Tropical literature where there is both a stronger need to minutely distinguish different types of aspects and, especially, to frame those distinctions in language reminiscent of house relationships. I would disagree with most of the points other than (like you) thinking the language on squares is pretty decent and descriptive of the whole family of dynamic aspects.

Agreed. It did remind me a lot of what I first encountered in my exploration into the matter. Reminded me of my Tropical days.

While I see the entire series of "2-series" aspects (those that start with the conjunction then progressively divide the circle by 2, i.e., 45° multiples) as substantially the same, there doe tend to be (what I might call) a degradation of identification at each step, I first noticed this with Sun-Saturn aspects, where Sun-Saturn conjunction pepe, at least as adults, settled easily into the identification mode of "I am Saturn," the Sun-Saturn opposition people had more characteristics of (acting like they were feeling like) they were continually under a Saturn transit to their Sun. This ends up looking a lot like "I am Saturn," but begins with a different life experience Squares then have a little more "degradation of identification" but no loss of energy or degradation of the connection of the planets. And so forth.

This is probably one of the most interesting things I've ever heard. Is the case similar to the soft aspects? I imagine you'd say that with them there's less need and possibility of identification.

To be clear, I'm not saying "treat them as transits" in the sense that the natal aspects cause events, but that people's experience of having these aspects is more like the experience of having been under the long-term effect of a transit. For example (all other things being equal), Sun-Saturn opposition people are more likely to feel suppressed and, therefore, that they are struggling with authority over their autonomy, whereas Sun-Saturn conjunction people take up psychological ownership of their Saturn sides more readily.

I feel that this helps me understand my initial question, thank you this is perfect. I didn't know that there was this much nuance, this another revolutionary moment for me.

This is probably one of the most interesting things I've ever heard. Is the case similar to the soft aspects? I imagine you'd say that with them there's less need and possibility of identification.

If so, it's not easy to detect. They're such "another animal" - I frankly don't see any discernible difference between a trine and a square, though there is theoretically some sort of degradation when the trine is halved (not in strength - as you observed before - but in some other characteristics). Possibly, given the tendency toward structural rigidity in the "3 series," the sextile is a little more crystalized, a little more mental (in a way that is so subtle it should probably be ignored since I'm not sure I can usefully say anything about it). A clue: This series "drops off" faster than the "2 series," such that the 30° multiples that aren't already some other aspect (meaning the semi-sextile and quincunx) are mostly worthless - and I have speculated (which isn't worth a nickel at the market) that it's because they become increasingly rigidified and, by the second degradation of the trine, have already become inert.